Has Canon really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like about the new sensors yet?

my head exploded trying to comprehend this question.

It wasn't a question! It was an answer! The meaning of life! Wow!

You know, man, once you have seen light from the eternal flame it shines from your eyes burning through your brains. It's true. Our bodies emit photons and we can capture them. We are the children of the sun, just not as bright and shiny. The pros use avalanche photodiodes to count every last one in nitrogen cooled chambers isolated from the electromagnetic vibrations of the quirly world.

Maybe as you say, because they really don't have anything now that can match Nikon when it comes to sensors (or, more hopefully, they have something in the wings, but want Nikon to think they are still stuck in the past).

If you know or remember Paul Pope from DPReview, this well-informed guy has this to say:

"Not the best they could do by any means but rather the best they were permitted to do by the bean counters concerned with wafer yield in their sensor manufacturing...

So, we can expect the high megapixel sensor to appear in a 1D body. And if the engineers manage to convince the bean counters they have the yield under control, we may very well see the latest sensor technology from Canon in it.

And if the engineers manage to convince the bean counters they have the yield under control, we may very well see the latest sensor technology from Canon in it.

The bean counters won't have any problems with the yield rate if the marketing guys allow them to raise the price high enough to compensate... maybe it was too optimistic to expect a 46mp sensor to cost less than 10k, and Nikon's 36mp is the highest pixel rate you can put in a consumer body with current tech.

Maybe as you say, because they really don't have anything now that can match Nikon when it comes to sensors (or, more hopefully, they have something in the wings, but want Nikon to think they are still stuck in the past).

If you know or remember Paul Pope from DPReview, this well-informed guy has this to say:

"Not the best they could do by any means but rather the best they were permitted to do by the bean counters concerned with wafer yield in their sensor manufacturing...

So, we can expect the high megapixel sensor to appear in a 1D body. And if the engineers manage to convince the bean counters they have the yield under control, we may very well see the latest sensor technology from Canon in it.

The issue isn't that people think they will be better photographers with a larger mp camera. The reality is that it's a tool, you'll be the same photographer you were with your previous camera, but with additional capability for specific needs. Nikon demoed a D800 to me in early spring, I loved it and added two of them to my gear roster. They have consistently proven to be the right tools for specific assignments in comparison to my Canon 1DX bodies (which I love as well). Canon will most likely produce something in the next 18-24 months and I'll probably buy that body when it comes out. In the mean time Nikon has produced a winner, I've put them to work and paid for them several times over in the first few months of ownership. Didn't buy them to be "a better photographer", bought them because they made sense for me.

Seems like it's a bit arrogant to presuppose why an individual makes one choice or another in equipment purchases. Did we ridicule the Hasselblad shooter who bought a 4x5? Don't think so, and isn't that exactly the same thing? True enough that if you shoot crud on an 18 mp camera, you'll just shoot bigger files of crud on a D800, but what motivates a person, or gives them a right, to make a knee jerk judgement call about any of that?

On a serious note- I know we all like a nice rumor and to imagine what we can get in the future- but are the 5DIII/1Dx/1DsIII so bad that the Canon shooters who need high megapixels are out of work until the 46MP comes out?

I think for most, pros or amateurs, the cameras that are available today are more than capable and better than we ever thought possible, but every time something new or special comes along, we see opportunity and are inspired. So although I don't think anyone is out of work without the camera, a lot of new exciting work will be created once it is available.

+1

And that is why it is nice when people like you talk about the new opportunities brought about by advancement, as opposed to people complaining about what is available now. But I guess the nature of a forum dictates there will be both.

Indeed - I guess 90% of the people will agree that the current gear (my 60d for example) is absolutely sufficient for most shots, save some on low light for large prints or difficult sports tracking. And if people seek serious advice for the next investment I think they will find it here, though maybe a bit biased to expensive gear and L lenses.

But this a rumors forum about new tech, so I find it somewhat amusing when the argument "it's not about the gear" comes up when Canon does not deliver stuff that really shows a progress in comparison to the predecessors or Nikon. If people would like to vent their frustration about prices or features that is ok by me, and trash-talking that the next lens will be surely "THE" lens is nice while drinking coffee and waiting for Lightroom to process shots.

Indeed - I guess 90% of the people will agree that the current gear (my 60d for example) is absolutely sufficient for most shots, save some on low light for large prints or difficult sports tracking. And if people seek serious advice for the next investment I think they will find it here, though maybe a bit biased to expensive gear and L lenses.

But this a rumors forum about new tech, so I find it somewhat amusing when the argument "it's not about the gear" comes up when Canon does not deliver stuff that really shows a progress in comparison to the predecessors or Nikon. If people would like to vent their frustration about prices or features that is ok by me, and trash-talking that the next lens will be surely "THE" lens is nice while drinking coffee and waiting for Lightroom to process shots.

The thing is though that statement is correct, it's not about the gear. New state-of-the-art equipment doesn't make the photographer, it enables them to evolve as a photographer. I've seen outstanding pics coming from a cell phone and terrible ones coming from pro gear. What is amusing though is that people will use these same arguments as excuses to bash or troll. It's perfectly fine to express ones dissatisfaction with something that doesn't work properly or is defective, but to solely stir the pot for no specific reason except for their own hidden agendas is rather pointless. Btw, who is really trying to catch up to who here? Competition is good, so expect the race to go back-and-forth.

Btw, who is really trying to catch up to who here? Competition is good, so expect the race to go back-and-forth.

Imho atm Canon is hard-pressed to catch up to reality and sanity again. Given the current feature/price combinations this doesn't seem to be the usual volatile "AMD in front of Intel, then the other way around" situation, because once AMD falls behind Intel they concentrate on releasing products with more attractive prices. Conservative Canon with its immovable userbase seems to try "more of the same" no matter what the competition is up to (like 6d vs d600).

Logged

symmar22

Imho atm Canon is hard-pressed to catch up to reality and sanity again. Given the current feature/price combinations this doesn't seem to be the usual volatile "AMD in front of Intel, then the other way around" situation, because once AMD falls behind Intel they concentrate on releasing products with more attractive prices. Conservative Canon with its immovable userbase seems to try "more of the same" no matter what the competition is up to (like 6d vs d600).

+1I was strongly thinking about the race between Intel and AMD, or Nvidia and ATI (sorry AMD again). Here we have a highly competitive market, 2 different situations; with processors, AMD clearly lost the race against Intel, and generation after generation , their CPUs are disappointing performance wise, hence they now compete on the price segment.In the graphic card race, AMD is much closer to Nvidia and release their GPU generation shortly before Nvidia, as soon as Nvidia shows its own new gen GPUs, AMD is quickly reacting by adjusting the price, so that the performance/price ratio stays decent compared to the concurrence.I know digital SLRs are a bit more complex than a graphic card, but when we speak sensor tech, IMO Canon is, for the time being, behind Sony/Nikon, but instead of adjusting the price accordingly, they just raise it, strange sense of marketing....

I do not want here to enter the debate where the new 4.25D Mk7 has a better AF or can reach 508.000 ISOs, when Nikon can't. We talk about high megapixel cameras for users who have some need for. Who are the people who need such cameras ? Likely people who do high end work where technical quality is a must (beauty shots, art reproduction, architecture, landscape, ...). We are talking about people who need a specific camera for a specific task, and the closest tool to their requirements is medium format. Here, super high ISO, amazing framerate and combat AF systems are irrelevant, the only requirement is a GOOD sensor, with as much DR as possible, the most faithful color reproduction and a high resolution.

Problem is pricing of MF systems is closer to real estate than cars. So a lot of people, including pros, can not afford such systems. In the good old days, a SINAR system was f.....g expensive, but you would keep it for 20 years. How long is the lifespan of a DSLR ?It makes sense to produce FF DSLR that fit that niche, and even at 8-10k, it would be reasonable for lots of pros IF the camera can really deliver. For now, the only camera that comes close to that IQ is the D800(E), sold for 3k+. My point is that Canon will have to release a sensor AND body that crushes it, if they want to sell it 3 times the price. Though I am not sure it requires the 1D form factor, a 5D3 body would more than do the job, and would be a better answer to the D800(E).

One last word about the D1X merge, some see it as the best of both worlds, well I don't. Sport / wildlife photographers have lost the reach with their lenses, and studio / landscape photographers have lost their pixels, looks like it was mainly targeted at news pros who need speed, WA lenses and extreme reliability. It's a strange move, since pro shooters have specific needs that require specific cameras, and Canon is proposing only one answer to these needs. Their offer was IMO better scaled with the previous DSLR generation.

Btw, who is really trying to catch up to who here? Competition is good, so expect the race to go back-and-forth.

Imho atm Canon is hard-pressed to catch up to reality and sanity again. Given the current feature/price combinations this doesn't seem to be the usual volatile "AMD in front of Intel, then the other way around" situation, because once AMD falls behind Intel they concentrate on releasing products with more attractive prices. Conservative Canon with its immovable userbase seems to try "more of the same" no matter what the competition is up to (like 6d vs d600).